Two Crazy Emails, What You Can’t Control, & Blind Faith

I received more than 30 emails in response to my last blog post. The vast majority of them were positive and useful. But two of them were a little crazy, and even dangerous in terms of faith in systems that would likely fail in the face of a real attack.

The first one came from a wing chun instructor. Before I post it I should mention that several of the positive emails I received were also from wing chun instructors. As I wrote in the last blog post, there are effective techniques in wing chun, and some WC instructors (especially the ones that tend to write me) teach the techniques in a functional manner, along with other systems that train what WC is lacking. So don’t take the email below as representative of all WC instructors. Here it is (cursing edited out by me):

You comment on wing Chun like you know anything about it. Well if you take all the sh&@*y wing Chun teachers then you will have sh&$%y students. Someone who knows the art it looks nothing like wing Chun , anyone who knows wing Chun knows that . An there are many so called functional martial arts instructors who got their f*$#ing certification in a weak long class. So just like everything else you have people who scholdnt be teaching that are. And let me see your certifications in the arts you claim to know all about!

This email is typical of the negative emails I tend to get (which are rare). The writing is usually terrible, even when written by a native English speaker, and there is never any actual argument against whatever point I was making that they disagree with…for obvious reasons. But this guy really is a martial arts instructor, certified by very well known martial artists. So he’s out there teaching people, which is scary.

What he doesn’t realize is that I’ve studied in the past with the same people and groups that he has, which makes implying that he knows wing chun but I know nothing about it rather laughable. For the sake of being transparent, I do not have any certification in wing chun. I was never interested in specifically teaching wing chun, and quit wearing my first black belt soon after I got it, disillusioned with rank…having seen how little it actually means. Actual skill/ability and knowledge are important to me. These things tend to have very little to do with certification in the majority of systems, and I’d rather people focus on ability, knowledge, and logic instead of believing in a certificate.

My point in the last post was that every style is limited by nature. If it is a specific style, then it is not any other style, which automatically limits it. That’s pretty hard to disagree with if you think about it with an open mind for just a moment. But a “pure stylist” is going to have a problem with that, because he believes in his system, and this idea is going to conflict with his belief. Rather than changing his belief when faced with contrary evidence or thinking, he resorts to a personal attack. It’s sad, but common.

What You Cannot Control

The second email wasn’t crazy in terms of content. But the idea within it is, and it’s something I tried to address in a previous post. The guy who wrote it said he agreed that wing chun doesn’t work, which is not something I actually said, as wing chun techniques can work if trained and used properly, but that the reason was because it was a martial art and not actual self defense. He then went on to explain that no martial art or fighting system works in self defense, because in self defense you cannot fight your opponent…you need to just take him out…with Combatives.

This is nice in theory. Just take out your opponent. But in reality, you cannot control what your opponent does!

This is a fundamental concept that is extremely important to understand. Many martial art instructors only teach with cooperative training drills. These drills assume that your opponent will move a certain way, respond a certain way, that your defensive technique will succeed, and so on. But it may not go that way. It probably won’t go that way!

When you have two or more powerful adults trying their best to hurt or kill each other, there will be chaos. Even if you are an outstanding martial artist or a highly skilled self defense practitioner, your techniques will be dictated by the position, movement, and reactions of your opponent. And you cannot control that. You can control what you do, but you cannot control what your opponent will do. This is why training against an uncooperative opponent is absolutely essential. That’s how it’s going to be in reality.

So it’s great to say that you shouldn’t “fight” in self defense, that the MMA Base is all about fighting, and instead you should focus on just taking out your opponent with deadly techniques and unrelenting force. But let me ask you this: What happens when your opponent moves in an unexpected way? What happens when your opponent counters your attack? What happens if he has friends? What happens if you want to take him out, but he makes it a “fight”?

I’d like to know what you think about this and if it makes sense to you. So please let me know in the comments below. Have you also trained in schools or with instructors who assume that their techniques are simply going to work? Why is it so difficult to understand that an opponent is going to resist, and you need to be prepared for that?

Want to get FREE self defense material and tips?Just enter your name and email below:

We will not share your email address with anyone. No spam, guaranteed.

27 Comments

My sifu Nino Bonaduce was certified under Mai Ping clan…. My sifu after he received his certification he started training in JKD…. The reason behind this was he also realized that wing chun lacked the necessarily skill to deal with with a boxer’s way of fighting…. He found himself at times troubled with not having an answer to counter an uppercut/ jab… When I started training with him I wasn’t really interested in JKD… I wanted him to teach me traditional wing-chun… As I progressed and we sparred I found out for myself what was great in wing chun and what wasn’t…The wing chun stance gave me limited mobility compared to the JKD stance… The kicks in Wing-chun are used more to bother the opponent than to actually injure the opponent… From my experience then on I decided to train in JKD Where the concept of USE NO WAY AS A WAY was engraved into my martial art… Learning to think and act like a boxer was crucial in understanding my body mechanics… Learning footwork from fencing helped me know when and how to close the gap with my opponent or simple retreat and not get hit…. The reason why I love your book is because I feel that whatever is being said or projected is exactly the way my Sifu explains me things… The book shows you what works and what might not work so well….Thanks David…

That’s great Lorenzo…a perfect illustration. The JKD concept, “use no way as a way” is outstanding. It makes perfect sense, and was probably the most influential concept in my own training. Unfortunately many JKD instructors have perverted the concept, adding a “fancy mess” of different “ways” that detract from the simplicity and effectiveness of what Bruce Lee was trying to do. That’s why I took a different path instead of using the JKD label. However, I know there are a number of JKD instructors who remain true to the concept.

This whole argument is kinda silly. I see fights on Bourbon Street all of the time as a cop in New Orleans. Violence of action and a continued and unrelenting vicious attack or counter-attack wins fights, hands down. Few if any of the people on the street train at all but what they lack in training they make up for in brutality or at least will to win. Alcohol helps is a wonderful fuel for this (calm down, I’m not advocating training loaded). Too many martial artists view fighting like a duel where two people square off and fight in a controlled environment. That’s BS. Would Wing-chung work? Maybe. More to the point, would a person skilled and fast with his hands who broke his opponent’s nose first work? More than likely. Personally I say f$#k style. Learn to execute a few techniques well which work for you and train them until they’re muscle memory. The only real way to do that safely is in a relatively safe environment with matted floors and instructor staff on hand like an MMA gym. An MMA/BJJ/boxing/Krav Maga type gym will at least normally put you into an environment where you’re going to spar with fully resisting opponents. Not many other “styles” which people are so in love with and anchor their egos to can say that. Train hard, train often, and shut the f$#k up!

Good points, and I generally agree with them. Hitting first and hitting hard works very well, and the person who does it will usually “win”. However, we all have specific and limited experience. Fights in New Orleans on Bourbon Street will be different from typical fights in other areas…where for example people are more likely to be trained and clear/level headed. So while hitting first and hitting hard can work in many situations, you need the ability to continue the “fight” if that strategy doesn’t work right away…which is exactly what you would learn if someone followed your training recommendations.

Thing is with martial arts is that a lot of them were developed years and years ago. So at a time martial arts like karate and Wing Chun did work. Techniques in karate and other arts were made for purposes that aren’t relevant today. You may have heard how masters would be almost unbeatable back then and that is why people assume it will work today. These days it would be a different story. Question about Combatives theory about knocking the opponent out rather than fighting. Isn’t that possible at times? Some techniques may be able to work if you have the best strategies for the situation and so on. Is it worth thinking about that?

Those are also good points Jake. And along with systems being developed a long time ago, they were developed in geographically isolated places where people didn’t have as well rounded skills as they can easily attain today.

Like shifter2 wrote…YES, it is possible that quickly knocking an opponent out without fighting will work. That is the ideal. It’s what I ALWAYS aim for, and you can see it on my website with strategies like the blast and the crash. So it is most definitely worth thinking about that, and attempting to do it. But you also need to know what to do in case it fails, or in case your opponent has friends.

I see. I am reading your book and it is a very good read. I am thinking of getting my friend who knows some MMA as a training partner. If he busy a lot of the time how can you find a partner who has not too little basic knowledge of boxing to train but is not stuck in the false beliefs about what works. Probably not an easy question to answer so don’t worry. Btw thanks for your reply?

I would suggest either looking for other people who are into more realistic training, or just continuing to look for someone who is serious about self defense (but not too serious!). In the not too distant future, I hope to add something to my website where people can connect with other people interested in functional training.

Sport – competition tournaments with rules and referees. Equally matched in skill and size. Each fighter uses the same style. The objective is to defeat your opponent to win money or a trophy. It is not necessary to injure your opponent to win. One party or the other can “tap out” or quit the contest. Doctors are present and ready to provide medical aid. Rules are established an enforced. Certain areas of the body are off-limits. Time limits are enforced. A referee determines the winner. No armed opponents. Single opponent contests. “Skilled competitive fighters train for one specific scenario.”

Self-Defense – You are not informed of what way a specific attacker will attempt to attack you. Will the other “attacker” not competitor attempt to kick, strike or grab you. Attacker’s strike without warning and could be
larger and stronger than you. You won’t know ahead of time what skill level the other “attacker” possesses. Attacking you continuously and relentlessly. The attack wants to hurt or kill you. No rules, everything goes. The length of time the fight continues isn’t considered. Street attacks continue until someone is either seriously injured or dead. In self-defense, the attacker might well possess an array of weapons, such as knives, club like weapons, or guns. Multiple assailants with varying weapons is possible.

I agree with what you wrote Penny in terms of self defense vs. sport. All of that is most definitely true.

However, highly trained sport fighters will typically have very good reactions, know how to fight, and be very tough. On the other hand, many “highly trained” traditional martial artists will be no better in terms of awareness and ability to deal with weapons, multiple attackers, and environmental issues than a sport fighter, but they may also have worse reactions, not know how to fight, and not be tough. So although there are problems with sport systems for self defense, the TRAINING usually makes them better than traditional martial arts.

With all of that said, sport systems and traditional systems generally need many additions to be effective for self defense. It’s just that those additions are different in each case. Traditional martial artists usually need better techniques, better training, and better strategy. Sport fighters usually have very good training…but could use additional techniques and strategy…which is easier than dealing with someone who has never had good training…in my experience.

Really more what I meant was just an onslaught of hitting or at least closing the distance and taking the bad guy down and keeping him down with whatever is appropriate. I didn’t mean relying on one big popeye style knockout punch and then not knowing what to do if that doesn’t work.

I think a lot of traditional martial arts in the modern world are really watered down from what they originally were, not to mention, they were designed to be used when you had lost your weapon or farm implement which you were using as a weapon.

I know what you mean, primarily because I know who you are. But what you’re saying sounds a bit like what the guy who emailed me said, regarding only needing to use and train offensive techniques. But I know (and you also mentioned in your first post) that you realize how important training against an uncooperative opponent is, so you don’t get nailed as you attempt to take out your opponent, etc. A hard, continuous attack is necessary. In order to make that work you need a variety of systems with comprehensive coverage (of techniques and ranges) combined with training against uncooperative opponents. Just want to make that clear.

All I can say is, we should all be humble and not make a mountain out of a mole hill. We should acknowledge that nothing no matter how good it is, can be all things to all people and every scenario. Having said that, it is not wrong to seek knowledge far and wide, although I acknowledge a person starts somewhere is and is loyal to their particular group. Personal loyalties aside, let’s admit that sometimes other people have good ideas and that we must admit our limitations and seek knowledge and application where we can find it. This all sounds like a religious debate in that we want to label persons who are not like us like heretics or apostates. Hopefully, in this modern pluralistic world we are beyond these parochial mentalities. Closed doors students may have worked in the old feudal times but in this day and age with the information age , if we want to preserve the martial arts we need to be more open and allow cross fertilization of ideas. Otherwise, like the gene pool in a closed society , we get irrelevant and in bred and that is bad for survival , culturally or otherwise. That is my two cents.. I hope I did not offend someone’s sacred tradition with my opinions.

Regarding loyalty… I’m the first person to give respect where respect is due. However, I generally think “loyalty” is a negative thing. It prevents a person from seeing beyond who or what they’re loyal to.

Martial arts are often very much like religion. People follow them with faith, instead of examining them with a skeptical point of view. And anything or anyone that doesn’t practice the same “style” is “bad”.

I must say, i had a little taste of this a few months ago.. I practice shitoryu karate and recently attained the orange belt. it’s a low rank, but i don’t care about colors. I care about knowledge! That’s why even though i’m fascinated by this style, I look at it for what I perceive it to be. I didn’t say “for what it is” because I don’t know what it is as I haven’t seen it in its entirety. Not yet. But I did notice how out of date it can be. My Sensei is a 5th dan, and regarding a self defense situation, he always told us the preferable option (once you’re there, with all it means) if possible, is to run. We train both sparring and form, we analyze the many forms and their potential, be it brutal, mortal or whatever.. but there is no escaping this: those are predetermined situations, drills we do with cooperative opponents. The good parts are that you learn coordination, timing, body movement, footwork etc. But I couldn’t say I’m able to get out of any situation, honestly. Real life is different. My point was, i have realized there is sort of a religious mentality around all this.. because i look at it all for what it is, I ask a lot. I learned too many questions are not appreciated. Not always. Not much. Sometimes, not at all. That made me consider other options, other roads. I didn’t change. I am loyal to this style. But my loyalty imposes me to look at it honestly, objectively.. Being loyal, for me, means looking for flaws if there are, so as to strenghten the style! To keep it alive, useful, coherent! I’ll finish my path, so I’ll have a clearer vision. But i will be curious of all the rest. I owe it to myself. Btw, I bought your book, I’m reading it. I’m in no position to judge or anything, i’ll just say thanks for the effort, it’s very detailed and clear!

You’ll probably see in time that karate is not ideal for self defense. That’s totally fine if the reason you’re doing it is for fun, exercise, the social aspect, etc. It can be a fun and enjoyable style like any other sport or art. And just like with wing chun, there are many techniques in karate that can be used for self defense, but ideally they need to be modified and trained differently. They also should be complimented with techniques from other systems.

Unfortunately, in many martial art schools (not just karate schools) there is a strict adherence to tradition (often outdated), and asking questions is not appreciated. To me this is a real problem. You cannot make a style better if the style cannot be changed, if tradition is more important than “evolution”. You and your skills will be limited by the limitations of the style. So while you may consider loyalty to include looking for flaws and making a style better, it’s unlikely the instructor will have that same point of view. And you are correct…it is a religious mentality.

I believe that the problem with martial arts strive in the thinking of the practitioner. When they talk about form they think that there is only one way to fight, nothing farther than the true. Forms are meditative, solitary exercises which develop self-awareness, balance, relaxation and sensitivity. Forms also train the practitioner in the fundamental movement and the correct force generation.
Learn the form, but seek the formless. Hear the soundless. Learn it all, and then forget it all. Learn The Way, and then find your own way.

This is the correct way to fight; you do not have to do any specific form or movement in order to fight well. You need to believe in yourself, train hard and become formless. Any martial arts should be good in order to defend yourself anywhere anyway. But if you are poor conditioned, if your Sifu, Sensei doesn’t teach you the brutality of the street fight, if you believe too much in the sport aspect of martial art, if you haven’t mastered your style, if you doesn’t understand the aspect of becoming formless, then you are in the wrong place. I was once told by one of my Sifu’s that he will teach me one technique and I should develop at least ten form that one. And the sky is the limit. Don’t just settle for the day’s class, ask for more, seek the one beyond, go farther than the others, fight “spar” with an uncooperative partner, check with people who do boxing, wrestling, jut jitsu, etc.

I’m a practitioner of Wing Chun, Jow Ga Kuen and Tai Chi, I’m planning to open a school. And you can be certain that I fight well “on the street” with any of the styles and I will teach my students the difference between kwoon “dojo” fighting and street fighting. Although the first thing to learn is always to avoid. The best battle is the one no fought. But if you need to fight, then you should be able to inflict the maximum amount of destruction to the enemy in the minimum amount of time, them keep moving. And you should be able to do this if you really mastered your style, make a conscious effort to become formless, and really understand the concept of street fight. Street fight is not easy and this needs a different approach. No everybody who teaches martial arts understands this. It’s better not to be there, but if you are and you must do, then do it brutally right, no mercy, your life depends on it. If you don’t think you are getting the right training for this, then move on. And don’t be afraid of certifications, this are only a milestone, it will make you fill good, but you real knowledge is in your heart, mind. And body.

Ed… I don’t doubt your sincerity, and I appreciate your response. But respectfully, I have several major issues with it.

I agree with you in terms of having to be formless. And I even agree with you on the benefits of solo forms. However in 95% of cases, and 100% of the time when you have a training partner or other practitioners around, I’m certain that solo forms are a waste of time when it comes to self defense. It’s not that you can’t get any benefit from doing solo forms. You can. But there are far, far better ways to train that will give you the same benefits + a whole lot more, and much faster. I have a page on solo forms which explains my thoughts in more details, here.

You wrote that any martial art should be good to defend yourself. Unfortunately this is entirely inaccurate. Most martial arts lack the techniques, training methods, and strategies to apply them in self defense. Therefore, they cannot be used in self defense successfully, unless one is very lucky and happens to win by chance. Many, many martial arts will actually make you worse off in self defense than had you done nothing.

A practitioner is not going to be able to be “formless” if all they have learned is one limited/stylized system. If an instructor says that they are teaching one technique but you need to develop ten from it, then something is very wrong. First of all, there are not THAT many effective techniques. Second, it would be faster and more effective if your teacher just taught you what worked from the beginning!

The bottom line is that you are training and recommending training that is extremely sub-optimal. Is it possible for a practitioner to learn to defend themselves using solo forms, coming up with their own techniques, and having to differentiate between “dojo fighting” and “street fighting”? Sure. But it would be like using a screw driver when you need a hammer. It’s possible, but very, very undesirable. It’s taking a long and possibly never ending path to a destination that could have been arrived at MUCH faster.

The biggest problem I have with this is that self defense is important for some people. It can even be an urgent need. You can give them what they need relatively quickly, if you know how to do so. Or you can give them the long and wasteful route that includes all sorts of things that are unnecessary. Why do that? Additionally, telling a student or practitioner that avoidance is the first priority is not enough. You need to teach them how to avoid.

Fighting well with a particular style is relatively useless if your opponent has already taken you out with something that falls outside the boundaries of your styles. The key isn’t to learn different styles. The key is to learn beyond style from the beginning. Otherwise you are taking a convoluted path that is likely to lead nowhere in terms of functional self defense.

Greetings! David:
Thanks for your response, very interesting, although I differ a little.

I do believe in solo forms, but I also believe in fighting “sparring” with an uncooperative partner and with people of another systems. Any martial arts should be good for defense, the problem with martial arts taught today is that they rely too much on the sport side of the system; they prefer to win medals doing forms, fighting with too many rules, searching for colored belts, etc. You know that there is children’s as low as 12 with a black belt.

I was a combat infantryman, and I been studying martial arts for the last 30 years now. The reason I choose southern Chinese martial arts is because of its development. Northern Chinese martial arts are too close with religion and culture, with lot and lots of forma and technique. Sothern Chinese martial art was developed in a different way. They needed a system that worked fast in close spaces with devastating consequences. Some of the styles come from Northern Shaolin, the masters took what they think didn’t work and created a different one. Some like Jow Ga Kuen are a mix of different styles. Not too pretty but very effective. This means that a system can be opened to additions, at least the southern ones.

When I teach a student to avoid, the avoidance technique it’s taught. The idea of avoidance and not be there is not just a word but a training practice as well.

People tent to misunderstand the concept of formless. Bruce Lee did. Everything that you do in life must become with a form; writhing, reading, bicycle and motorcycle riding, skate board, shooting, etc. When you mastered it, it will become like a second nature. It will come to you when you need it, and then you can do different things that were not taught to you. Of course not everybody is created equal; some will get the macro while others will stay with the micro. That is why practitioners should strive for the best training, for realistic training, with emphasis on wining.

Don’t get me wrong, I also have training for street self defense that I’m preparing for those people who doesn’t have time or doesn’t care about traditional systems. That’s why I’m a subscriber. It’s good to know all the opinions. Remember I need to keep my friends close and my enemies closer, Ha, ha, ha… just kidding.

At the end without any kind of regret I‘m firm believer in traditional martial art that is well taught, without any complicate mumbo jumbo, a system that show you the real deal on the street brutal as it is. It has worked for me and for others traditional martial artist like; Richard Clear and Doc-Fai Wong just to mention few.

At the end we are brothers in martial arts and self defense, we strive for the same, quality in training, preparedness for self defense regardless of system. I would like to meet you one of this day, right now is not possible, I will get neck surgery next week. But I will look forward to meet with you; you do have a good mind about self defense, although no compatible with mine. Les see, maybe we could spar one of this day and exchange techniques.
Have a great day
In Mastery, Sifu Ed

You wrote that any martial art “should” be good for self defense. We agree on that! But we also agree that many if not most are not. Unfortunately.

You said you believe in solo forms. Do you think you cannot get the same benefits and even more from doing “two person forms”? If you don’t have a partner, then I have no problem with doing solo forms or training. But if you do have a partner available, I see no reason to ever use solo forms, only because you can befit equally and them more from partner training.

One problem I have with what are commonly known as “traditional martial arts” is that they tend to be very limited in terms of scope (only stand up, only ground, only strikes, only weapons, etc.). Another problem is that there are so many ineffective training methods. Can a “traditional martial artist” be good at self defense? Of course! But it may take an unnecessarily long time, pulling the needles from the haystack. My emphasis is self defense first. So this approach doesn’t make sense to me. If a person’s emphasis/goals are different…then it really doesn’t matter.

it is difficult to comment on a martial arts topic without elliciting feedback. what i find disconcerting is how easily you are ready to set aside years of experiance and tradition. The first example is when you stated you no longer wear your blackbelt and the disillusion you suffer from it . It seems it is you who is weak in faith and tradition. I train in Kajukenbo , the original mixed martial art. so come up with your own system instead of deconstructing everyone elses!!!!!!!!

Hello Sibak. It’s not that I’m “weak in faith and tradition”, it’s that I’m philosophically opposed to them. Faith requires the suspension of logic and reason. It requires belief without evidence, and I see no use for that in any area of life, especially not in something as potentially life threatening as a self defense situation. I’m also against tradition for the sake of tradition, without examination, thoughtfulness, and self expression. Although, I have no issues with tradition in terms of ethnic or “locally evolved expression”/art, as long as it doesn’t require dead/stagnant copying.

The reason I “deconstruct” other systems is to help people who practice them to understand what elements of them are useful for self defense and which elements are not. This is extremely important in my view. If you are only training for fun, then it doesn’t matter. But where I come from many people trained for “survival”…to avoid attacks or not get seriously injured or worse. I feel it would be unethical not to deconstruct these systems, when I have the ability and knowledge to do so.

Hi David. What you say is always interesting, you got only 2 crazy e-mail from a post where you questioned martial art effectiveness, I think you should be proud. 🙂
In my opinion, Martial Arts addresses many needs, some better than others, one of these is self defense, and yes I agree with you MA are not the best approach to SD. Other needs MA addresses are, imho, belong to a pack, bow to a Master, follow the right path, something similar to what Religion address. You can’t counter faith with logic, religion with logic, where MA is a religion, logic has no place: People practice the only right style according to the only true master who teach exactly the way his master did.